> -----Original Message-----
> From: Loftus, Ciara <ciara.lof...@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2024 9:20 PM
> To: Du, Frank <frank...@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] net/af_xdp: fix umem map size for zero copy
>
> >
> > The current calculation assumes that the mbufs are contiguous.
> > However, this assumption is incorrect when the memory spans across a huge
> page.
> > Correct to directly read the size from the mempool memory chunks.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Frank Du <frank...@intel.com>
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> Before your patch the umem_size was calculated using mb_pool->populated_size
> * rte_mempool_calc_obj_size(mb_pool->elt_size, ..) With your patch we sum up
> the lens of all memhdrs in the mempool.
>
> When debugging I see the new calculation can yield a larger value, but the new
> logic looks good and more thorough to me so I'm happy to opt with the new
> approach.
Hi Ciara,
Thanks for the review. The reason for a larger value is that, the pool contain
some necessary space hole to ensure one single mbuf does not span two virtual
huge page, so that the PA of each mbuf is secure for the hardware operation.
>
> Acked-by: Ciara Loftus <ciara.lof...@intel.com>
>
> Thanks,
> Ciara
>
> >
> > ---
> > v2:
> > * Add virtual contiguous detect for for multiple memhdrs.
> > ---
> > drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > -
> > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > index 268a130c49..7456108d6d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > @@ -1039,16 +1039,35 @@ eth_link_update(struct rte_eth_dev *dev
> > __rte_unused, }
> >
> > #if defined(XDP_UMEM_UNALIGNED_CHUNK_FLAG)
> > -static inline uintptr_t get_base_addr(struct rte_mempool *mp,
> > uint64_t
> > *align)
> > +static inline uintptr_t get_memhdr_info(struct rte_mempool *mp,
> > +uint64_t
> > *align, size_t *len)
> > {
> > - struct rte_mempool_memhdr *memhdr;
> > + struct rte_mempool_memhdr *memhdr, *next;
> > uintptr_t memhdr_addr, aligned_addr;
> > + size_t memhdr_len = 0;
> >
> > + /* get the mempool base addr and align */
> > memhdr = STAILQ_FIRST(&mp->mem_list);
> > memhdr_addr = (uintptr_t)memhdr->addr;
> > aligned_addr = memhdr_addr & ~(getpagesize() - 1);
> > *align = memhdr_addr - aligned_addr;
> > + memhdr_len += memhdr->len;
> > +
> > + /* check if virtual contiguous memory for multiple memhdrs */
> > + next = STAILQ_NEXT(memhdr, next);
> > + while (next != NULL) {
> > + if ((uintptr_t)next->addr != (uintptr_t)memhdr->addr +
> > memhdr->len) {
> > + AF_XDP_LOG(ERR, "memory chunks not virtual
> > contiguous, "
> > + "next: %p, cur: %p(len: %" PRId64 "
> > )\n",
> > + next->addr, memhdr->addr, memhdr-
> > >len);
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > + /* virtual contiguous */
> > + memhdr = next;
> > + memhdr_len += memhdr->len;
> > + next = STAILQ_NEXT(memhdr, next);
> > + }
> >
> > + *len = memhdr_len;
> > return aligned_addr;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1125,6 +1144,7 @@ xsk_umem_info *xdp_umem_configure(struct
> > pmd_internals *internals,
> > void *base_addr = NULL;
> > struct rte_mempool *mb_pool = rxq->mb_pool;
> > uint64_t umem_size, align = 0;
> > + size_t len = 0;
> >
> > if (internals->shared_umem) {
> > if (get_shared_umem(rxq, internals->if_name, &umem) < 0) @@
> > -1156,10 +1176,12 @@ xsk_umem_info *xdp_umem_configure(struct
> > pmd_internals *internals,
> > }
> >
> > umem->mb_pool = mb_pool;
> > - base_addr = (void *)get_base_addr(mb_pool, &align);
> > - umem_size = (uint64_t)mb_pool->populated_size *
> > - (uint64_t)usr_config.frame_size +
> > - align;
> > + base_addr = (void *)get_memhdr_info(mb_pool, &align,
> > &len);
> > + if (!base_addr) {
> > + AF_XDP_LOG(ERR, "Failed to parse memhdr info from
> > pool\n");
> > + goto err;
> > + }
> > + umem_size = (uint64_t)len + align;
> >
> > ret = xsk_umem__create(&umem->umem, base_addr,
> umem_size,
> > &rxq->fq, &rxq->cq, &usr_config);
> > --
> > 2.34.1
